Earthmoving Machine Blade Load Control Mode Switching

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Existing earthmoving machine systems require significant user input and attention, leading to operator fatigue and inefficiencies in tasks like dozing, where automation is partially implemented but still relies heavily on manual intervention.

Innovation Solution

A system that automatically adjusts blade or bucket control modes based on detected machine states and operator commands, allowing for either load protection in light dozing or productivity optimization in heavy dozing, using a controller to determine the appropriate mode and assist the operator in maintaining desired operating points.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Productivity

If automatic tool control is implemented, then operator fatigue is reduced and efficiency is improved, but the system complexity increases and requires sophisticated mode selection logic

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveoperator efficiencyVSAvoidcontrol system complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
ProductivityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The system dynamically switches between manual and automatic control modes based on real-time machine state and operator input detection. The controller transitions between modes seamlessly, providing adaptive automation that adjusts to current operational conditions rather than using a fixed control structure

Inventive Principle:
Principle #15Dynamics

Solution Approach 2:

The automatic mode detection system self-regulates by monitoring machine state and operator commands, automatically determining when to engage automatic control without requiring explicit operator initiation. The system serves itself by detecting its own operational context and adjusting control accordingly

Inventive Principle:
Principle #25Self-service

2Reliability

If the work tool is automatically moved to adjust machine state, then undesirable machine states are prevented, but manual control authority is reduced

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvemachine state stabilityVSAvoidoperator control authority
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSEase of operation

Solution Approach 1:

The system continuously monitors machine state and operator commands, using this feedback to determine when automatic intervention is appropriate. The controller detects operator intent and machine conditions, then applies automatic control only when needed to prevent undesirable states, maintaining a feedback loop that balances automation with operator authority

Inventive Principle:
Principle #23Feedback

Solution Approach 2:

Automatic control is applied selectively to specific aspects of tool operation only when undesirable machine states are detected, rather than controlling all tool movements. Manual control remains active for normal operations, with automatic intervention localized to specific corrective actions

Inventive Principle:
Principle #3Local quality

3Productivity

If the blade load is controlled toward target operating state, then productivity is optimized in heavy dozing, but the system requires continuous monitoring and adjustment

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveheavy dozing productivityVSAvoidtime for monitoring and adjustment
Core Design Contradiction:
ProductivityVSLoss of time

Solution Approach 1:

The automatic blade control system monitors machine state and automatically adjusts blade load toward the target operating state without requiring continuous operator intervention. The system serves itself by detecting deviations from optimal performance and self-correcting, eliminating the need for constant manual monitoring

Inventive Principle:
Principle #25Self-service

Solution Approach 2:

Manual monitoring and adjustment actions are replaced with an automated control system that uses sensors and controllers to continuously manage blade load. The mechanical control system is augmented with electronic automation that performs monitoring and adjustment functions previously requiring operator attention

Inventive Principle:
Principle #28Mechanics substitution (Replace mechanical system)

Data Source

PatentUS9896820B2Operator assist algorithm for an earth moving machine
Publication Date: 2018.02.20 CATERPILLAR INC
  • US9896820B2 patent drawing
  • US9896820B2 patent drawing
  • US9896820B2 patent drawing

AI summary

A system and method are provided for assisting a machine operator in controlling a work tool of the machine. In an embodiment, the work tool is set at a first height and the machine is travelling at a first machine speed, resulting in a first work tool or machine load. Based on these factors, a first work tool control mode or second work tool control mode is chosen. In the first work tool control mode, the work tool is manually controlled within a load limit and a work tool height limit, whereas in the second work tool control mode, the work tool load is controlled toward the first work tool load. Based on operator inputs and machine state, as well as other factors such as ground surface, the machine may switch between control modes, or out of automatic work tool control entirely.